Изображения страниц

federacy as far as we are able. When Holland was in danger, they made us pay 600,000l. for that little assistance they sent us. I am apt to think that many of the misfortunes to us in Flanders are for having so many men there. Their Army lost not so many. The English

were knocked on the head, and we had not so many men, we had not so many detachments, and so the French beat up our camp. All we have hitherto given amounts to no inore effect than to be beaten abroad, and beggared at home.

Dr. Barbon. I should be loth to see Trade regulated at Amsterdam, and war at the Hague. If this number of men be found reasonable, I shall agree to it. If not, I would call the Advisers to account. Sir John Dorrell. I am amazed at this Estimate as much as any man. The objection, want of success-But when the fathers have eaten sour grapes, the children's teeth are set on edge.' The last reigns made the French so great, that we cannot now pull them down. Cromwell neglected Europe to save himself. And the two last reigns went in the steps of Oliver. Either we must be at the charge to pull down this vigorous monarch, or not. If we will lie down to be trodden on, we may. But let the sum we give be laid impartially, as in other places. This charge is borne by the fortieth part of England. If every shoulder bore part of the proportion, the sum of two millions would be easily borne. I join with the motion for an Address.

Sir Charles Sedley. This Army is not so dangerous as is said. It is to defend us from France and Popery. If Holland be destroyed, it is our turn next. The king tells us of the want of numbers, and certainly numbers must be continued, if not increased. There is a great and terrible sum to be raised: but we are not yet under Excises. This sum will be great, but the nation cannot be saved without it. We cannot be safe without an Army; neither safe at home, nor considerable abroad.

Mr. Harley. I do not doubt but this house will consider the necessity to preserve the nation and the confederacy, so much as belongs to us; but that is not the question before us; but the Treaties and Alliances. I hope, when we raise the money, that we shall satisfy them that sent us. When these are before us, then it will be time for us to judge. That which surprizes me is what is talked of f'general excises,' on both sides the house. Let us be careful that what we give this year we may be able to give the next, without filling the nation with Publicans, and the house with Excisemen.

Sir Tho. Littleton. You had the Alliances last year before you, and I think none were broken. The king tells us, That our Allies declared they would augment in the midst of their distress; and they did very wisely, and seasonably, to keep up the hearts of their people. Nobody doubts but that the king tells you true of the want of mes. Thompson tells you, 'If you had less men, you would have less kill

| ed;' and I say, if you had had none, you would have had none killed. If the French king be wearier of the War than we,less money will carry it on. The manner of collecting the Tax, &c. has been a Grievance, but nothing has been said of an Excise. If the French king can, you can easily carry on your Taxes; he will be the sooner weary. But why should we be surprized that this is a greater Estimate of our Forces ? Clarges is an able member, and always speaks to instruction. He tells you of precedents, &c. But was a kingdom ever in such a condition, the enemy stronger than you? I am sensible that, in the late reign, people without doors were ready to give, who now value themselves upon saving your money, when you are upon the utmost extremity. I believe the country would rather part with their money, than dwindle away from year to year: suppose it should fall out, that the Confederates should leave us; but if we leave them, the French king will be quickly full of money, and over-run us all.

Sir Tho. Clurges. All Treaties last time were defensive, not offensive, and that with Denmark should not extend to an offensive war with France,

Sir John Trenchard. The last year you sent such an Address to the king, and the Treaties were laid before you. The Treaty of Charles 2, with the States. I propose that this lie upon the table, and the house consider whe ther the whole or part.

[ocr errors]

Sir Tho. Clarges. The Treaties before you the last time were partly defensive. I remember, the Treaties of Charles 2 were brought to us. All defensive Treaties. They shall be maintained at the charge of the party sending;' but is it for us to be at all the charges? If aid be called for from us, we must judge of the Treaties.

Sir Christ. Musgrave. I was one of the first that made the motion for these Treaties, and see no reason why we should relinquish it. But you have been told, by Trenchard, of new concerts; therefore I would know what before, and what augmentation must be made now. I would have before us what should induce us to consent, and not do it, without knowledge; and if there be any Treaty, pray let us have it. I am more concerned than before, since a general Excise' has been talked of, for then adieu to our liberties at a blow! I would know what our allies were before, and what they are



Sir Tho. Clarges. Treaties are not verbal,


Secretary of State. "He had been engaged far with the duke of Monmouth, but got out of England, and lived some years beyond sen, and had a right understanding of foreign affairs. He was a calm and sedate man, and much more moderate than could have been expected, since he was a leading man in a party. The bringing him into that post was ascribed chiefly to the great credit which the earl of Sunderland had gained with the king." Bur


797] PARL. HISTORY, 5 WILLIAM & MARY, 1693.-Miscarriages of the Fleet. [798

but in writing. Since the house waves the
privy-counsellors signing the Paper of the
Forces, pray let us see the Treaties.

Col. Cornwall. When we must come in to the Confederates totis viribus, I would know why they have not their numbers complete? I would know what is become of these men We shall pay above double, and they not above half. Perhaps you may make the French king bring some of his men out of Germany, and be the weaker. Your increase of forces will be of no use. I believe they have not officers in Holland that have judgment to manage so great





following Account of the Convoy of the Turkey fleet: 1. I desire, as far as may be, to be excused from giving any opinion of the gentlemen that were entrusted with the conduct of the Fleet; but what the house pleases to comopportunities the Admirals had, after I left mand me I must obey. I cannot tell what them. I know not what opportunities they had, when they came back, to know whether the French were come out, or not. not of any intelligence they had, but I asked them, and they told me they had none. 2. I know There were several reports when we lay at Spithead. Sometimes, That a French squaThat their great ships were disarmed, and dron was out. The report at other times was, that small squadrons only were to come out.' We had no intelligence after, but what I have said, which had no weight with me at all, and I did not acquaint the Admirals with it. did not call the captains of the merchant-men 4. I It was the 18th of June before I came to the to a council of war, till I came to the Madeiras. Madeiras and then I went to Ireland. 5. After the signal was put out on board the Adfrom the Fleet, and had not gone on board, if mirals, I had reason to think myself separate structions for my proceedings. 6. A Portuthe weather had not proved fair, to receive inguese came on board me, but his intelligence with any body. 7. I did not send to the coast was so contradictory, that it gained no credit of Portugal to know whether the intelligence was true, because I gave no credit to it. If it had been the French fleet, it was happy I had greater than it was. not gone into the Ocean, and so made the loss 8. The result of the council of war I know nothing of, but that it was unanimous. 9. There were general decouncil of war, as of all councils, is, that they bates and arguments, and the custom of the of the council of war was unanimous. 11. I sign to the majority. 10. I believe the result believe the gaining intelligence, in former years, was by sending into Brest-Water, and understand, by their Resolution, what measures taking prisoners from the shore. 12. I did to take. 13. I have the Minutes, which I took the Admiral's intelligence, it was said,They at the council of war, about me. 14. As to had no ships proper for that service, to send in for intelligence.' I thought it unreasonable, and impracticable, to give orders in steering our course to Cadiz. All the flag-officers were have intelligence, but thought it impracticable of that opinion. 15. We expected we should to go into Ushant. 16. The council of war was on the 16th of Sept. I believe I did draw could not sign, and, I believe, that was the up the result, but there was something in it I reason why I did draw it up. 17. There was something proposed, at the opening the council of war, which I could not sign, viz. That the Orders the flag-officers had received, were council of war.' executed according to the Resolution of the I could not sign this, having been absent a great part of the summer.



an army.

Lord Colchester. If you do not encrease your forces, the honour of England will be lost. Though I have the best opinion of the English of any men, yet if they be so often baffled by numbers, they may become like other men. If we can come up with numbers equal to the French, we shall beat them. What induces me to this is my love to my country, and my religion. I love my ease as well as other men. I doubt not but, if we keep up our number, the king of France will come to ask a peace at the house of commons door.

Col. Cornwall. I have not so much experience as lord Colchester, but in one year I have seen more done, than in four years since. I do say, our forces were so equal before they drew out the detachment, that I ask, if the French durst have attacked us, if the duke of Wirtemberg had not gone out?

Mr. Harley. I speak to the wording of the question. You say, the forces shall be augmented. The proper question is, 'Whether the Land-Forces ? This question may be multiplied, and run into an endless debate.

Sir Christ. Musgrave. You have not approved the List, nor any part of it. The question is, Whether the number for England, &c. shall be the number for this year?'

Mr. Howe. I think you have performed your promise to the king, since he came to the crown, and I hope he will perform another, to see his promises kept to us. proposed good laws, in exchange of the money Our ancestors we gave them. I would know, whether you wish to be supported? Unless you better your condition, you are not fit to be supported. The king says, What seems good to you I will do.' Since it is not the question, whether you will send men into Flanders, you must either be strongest there, or make your peace with them that are so.


Resolved, "That an humble Address be presented to his majesty, by the privy-counsellors of the house, That his majesty will be pleased to command, that such offensive Treaties and Alliances, as his majesty is now under with the Confederates, and the proportions of Forces that the Confederates are obliged to make, for the carrying on of this War, may be laid before this house."

Debate on the Miscarriages of the Fleet resumed.] Dec. 6. Sir George Rooke attending, according to order, was called in, and gave the

25. I

I humbly presume it is very well known to several of the members, that it was never my opinion, that the Fleet should proceed in the circumstances they were designed. 19. The captain of a French fire-ship gave intelligence and I have said it in my Paper. I know neither the French nor the Portuguese language, and so must submit to an interpreter, and what was said is in my Paper. 20. I sent to some captains, and examined them apart, which I delivered in, in my Paper. 21. I never saw, nor heard of a fruit-ship, nor ever saw any ship, but one Dutch ship, from the Terceras, going to Amsterdam, till I met the French flect. 22. I remember not the lords of the admiralty, but I remember, that all the flag-officers went ashore with the Admirals, with the result of the council of war. 23. I believe they delivered it to the lords of the council at Portsmouth, because they went on shore for that purpose; but of its being transmitted to the lords of the admiralty I know not. 24. As the weather had proved, I believe we might have gone into Brest-Water. know not what orders the Admirals had; they were private orders, and I know not whether they went according to their orders. 26. I believe I was about two leagues off, when the signal of parting was given. 27. I know not whether I saw the orders of carrying the fleet to Lagos-Bay. I heard them read, but dare not offer my opinion in so weighty a matter. 28. I was present at the council of war, on board the Britannia, the 22nd of May. 29. The signal of parting was proposed in case of bad weather. 30. I approved the station of 30 leagues W.S.W. of Ushant. 31. I understood, that, when I came there, I shouid take farther measures what advice I should take, from the intelligence I should receive. 32. I have the Minutes of the Council of War, of May 22, about me-(which he read, and captain Parsons's Letter he read, viz. I wish you inay find out the men that were the occasion of your not proceeding in March.') 33. I think some other flag-officers made objections to the proposal; to the best of my remembrance, lord Berkeley, and admiral Aylmer. 34. The proposal was not drawn up, but offered and proposed. I had been absent a great part of the summer, and from the council of war too. 35. We had not proper ships for the service of sending to Brest (as before) June 4, and the men might suppose they were sent to be sacrificed. If I had committed errors, I might commit more. 36. Early in the morning the signal was put out. The weather proved fair; and I suppose that was the reason why the Admirals gave the signal for the council of war." [He withdrew.]


Mr. Chadwick. If you have any thing to ask the Admirals, they are at the door.

Lord Falkland. I would ask the Admirals some questions. You cannot else make a judgment upon the whole.

Resolved, That the Admirals be called in severally.

Admiral Killegrew, at the bar.—“ I, being but one in the commission, humbly crave, that those in the commission may come in. I know not else what inconvenience it may be to us. Between the 30th and the 6th, we sent out our scouts for what intelligence we could get. If we had sent into Brest, we must have lost our opportunity of sailing. A vessel that was sent out, took a fisherman, but he knew nothing. The admiralty sent us word, that they had not cruising ships. Had I sent a ship in, which way could it escape? If I had thought it feasible, I would have done it. We did nothing of any kind, nor made one step, without a council of war, where we three are but one man, and one voice; neither durst we have done otherwise. We endeavoured to get intelligence, but could not come at it. If orders were sent to us, that we could not put in execution, I hope the house will not blame us. We gave Rooke no orders, nor instructions, at parting.” [He withdrew.]

Sir Ralph Delaval, and sir Cloudesly Shovel, were then, separately, called in, and asked several questions, to which they gave answer; and then withdrew. And a motion being made, and the question being put, "That the Admirals that commanded the Fleet the last summer, by not gaining such intelligence as they might have done, of the Brest fleet, and not sending into Brest for intelligence, before they left the Streights squadron, are guilty of a high breach of the trust that was put in them, to the great loss and dishonour of the nation ;" it passed in the negative, 185 to 175. Charge against Lord Falkland.] Dec. 7. Mr. Harley, from the Commissioners of Accounts, acquainted the house, "That Mr.. Francis Rainsford, Receiver of the Rights and Perquisites of the Admiralty,having been examined before them upon oath, as to his Accounts in general, did acknowledge, That, about the 18th of March, the lord viscount Falkland sent for him, and desired to know how much money he could advance, as Receiver of the Rights of the Admiralty; and that it would be for his majesty's service to pay as much as he could." He then said, He would pay 4000 !.' That the 22nd of the said March he received from lord Falkland a letter, expressing the number and value of the Bills required, and desiring him to take no notice of it to any one. That he had the original of this Letter in bis custody till Monday last, when, being sent for by lord Falkland, he shewed the original to his lordship, and he kept it. That, in pursuance of the said Letter, he attended his lordship the next morning; and then acquainted him, That he could not bring his lordship notes that day for the whole 4000 l.' Whereupon, his lordship ordered him to bring notes for 2000 l. and to bring the other within 14 days. That afterwards, the same day, Mr. Rainsford brought six notes for the money, two of 5001. each, and four for 250l. each. That, upon the delivery of the said six notes, lord Falkland delivered to him an Order signed by his majes

ty, for paying the 40007. and also a Certificate of his majesty's signing; copies of which he produced. The hand-writing of the Papers he believed to be lord Falkland's. His lordship, upon receiving the said notes, gave him a receipt for his 2000 l. And, after the 14 days allowed him for paying the other 2000l. were expired, lord Falkland sent a servant to the said Mr. Rainsford; and thereupon, he attended his lordship about the 10th of April, with a note for 1000l. and about the 20th of April, with such another note. Upon which, his lordship took up his first acquittance for 2000/. and gave him a receipt for his majesty's use for 4000l. That lord Falkland did acknowledge, upon his oath, before the commissioners, That, the 23rd of March, 1692-3, he did receive from Mr. Rainsford, notes upon Mr. Fowles, for 20007. but could not remember to whom those notes were payable.' And his lordship said, 'The same day he did, by the king's order, deliver those notes to one who is no member of either house of parliament; and hath a receipt for the same. And his lordship farther owned the receipt of the other 20001. some time in April, which, he saith, is still in his hands; and that he hath attended his majesty, since his return; who told him, He had directions for him therein."

Debate thereon.] Lord Falkland. I acknowledge the receipt of 4000l. I have disposed of 2000l. of it, but not to parliament-men. I applied to the king for his directions for the remaining 2000. I can say no farther than I did to the Commissioners of Accounts. I received it by the king's order, and paid it to no members of parliament; and the rest is in my hands.

Sir Christ. Musgrave. I have not heard of such a way of proceeding. It seems, there was great haste for the payment of this money; but as great as the haste was, 2000l. is still in lord Falkland's hands. But I must observe, that when a man is brought to your bar, and ordered to attend, then for that lord to send to him, and take that letter from him, and say, Be sure you tell nobody of it!'-How many public purses must be in England? It looks as if this money was given-Bills of exchange in other men's names!-I find my respect can carry me to no other motion, but that, if lord Falkland has any thing farther to say he may; if not, that he withdraw.

Lord Falkland. I had directions from the king to receive this money, before he went into Flanders; the rest I should pay as he should direct. I hope this is no fault, to obey the king. The money was received by no meinber of parliament, nor was for the use of any member. The Account could not be made till all the money was received. I have paid it as the king has ordered, and so I shall do the rest. I desired the commissioner to send me a precept.

Lord Falkland. I believe, this money was for the king's immediate use, and when I brought the king the notes, he ordered me to pay it to the Clerk of the Closet for his immediate use.

Sir Tho. Clarges. According to order, lord Falkland ought to withdraw. I would know the sense of the house in it. VOL. V.

Sir Tho. Clarges. This Mr. Rainsford, I perceive, lord Falkland preferred into the Admiralty. He was pleased to send that letter, That what money he could pay should be kept secret.' Lord Falkland is a privy-counsellor, and brought blank notes to be signed by the king. It is the ordinary method, to pay money by the great seal, or privy seal. That was not done like a privy-counsellor, to advise to put the king in a figure of signing bills. It is a breach of Falkland's trust, and he ought to be tender of the honour of the king. He took up the letter again, and expressed himself, That it should he kept very secret;' but if the money was for the king's use, it might surely be no secret, to be paid by the king's direction. I think this lord has not used the king very kindly, to keep the money till he knew how to dispose of it.

Mr. Foley. I cannot but take notice, that all the report carries a suspicion, that this money is not to be owned. I cannot imagine, why these two notes should be sent to the goldsmith. I think, as has been observed, that it is a strange way of issuing money. The notes ought to be counter-signed. To whom these notes were to be paid, must be kept private. Four men were to have two notes. It is plain these were goldsmith's notes, to lie by, and to be paid at leisure. This lord gave a fortnight's liberty to pay these two notes, without acquainting the king. My lord thought not fit to tell the commissioners to whom this money was paid, but not to members of parliament.' This Randolph Keyn's name has been much used in money. I hope the house will have satisfaction from Keyn. By all the circumstances, it appears, that this money was put to an ill use, and I would vote it so.


Sir Tho. Littleton. I attended the report, and I observe several gentlemen have showed great jealousy, but I know not of what. I think, lord Falkland has fairly delivered himself of the 2000l. and the other 2000l. you may send for when you please. This may be the king's own money; may he not dispose of it? But if you will enquire into the king's private revenue, not disposed of by parliament, do as you please.

Mr. Harley. I stand up only to justify the Commissioners of Accounts. We are not to enquire into the privy purse; but this being a person who refused upon oath, this a bye-corner of the revenue, the commisssioners have done their duty. And, I believe, you will find this John Thomast a name much used. Do as you please.

Sir Tho. Littleton. I had no intention to

[blocks in formation]

make any reflection upon the Commissioners of Accounts. I am so far from thinking that they have not done their duty, that I think they have done more than their duty.

I hope that, if this lord be faulty, you will pus nish him accordingly.

Mr. Howe. If this lord had obeyed the king in any unlawful thing, I think it not warrantable; but to obey him in lawful commands, I think is the duty of every servant. I believe the king may have private uses for his money. and long may he have so; do what you please! Sir Tho. Clarges. Littleton tells you, ‘He made no reflection on the Commissioners of Accounts,' and excuses them with greater reflection. We, (the Commissioners, &c.) are made common enemies here, Littleton is of the robe, and he knows that the great seal, or privy seal, must dispose of the king's money.

Sir Christ. Musgrave. I think it a great fault before you, for a man to take upon him to draw warrants, and it is a diminution of the king's hand to sign warrants. But I think the crime of this lord is this; that, when a man was brought to the bar, to inform you of this payment, the same day he should take away the letter, that directed the payment. He deserves to go to the Tower for no other thing. The money is in this lord's hand, and he keeps it in his hand, and there is nothing plainer, than that this money was for Secret-Service. In a privy-counsellor, this is an offence. Has not the king a privy purse? If it was for the king's secret service, what need of such concealing it? You may reasonably say, this was for some service that ought not to be. The taking away the letter from Rainsford was an affront to the house, and I move, That this lord be sent to the Tower.'

Sir Charles Sedley. The king had this money, as private money, the perquisites of the lord admiral, there being none at present in being, and may dispose of this money as he pleases. I find this lord has done nothing but as first commissioner of the Admiralty, and paid it accordingly. He has told you, 'It was not for the use of any member.

Mr. Montagu. You are rightly informed of the course of payments of the king's money, by the great seal, or privy seal. I cannot tell by what rule, and know not how it is so. What issues from the Admiralty is not under the rules of payment in the exchequer.

Mr. Finch. How this money is to be directed, I know not the method; but I dare venture to say, it is not according to law. If it be by direction of the Admiralty, it ought to be signed by the Admiralty. This lord is a commissioner, and he prepares a warrant directed to himself. The 2000l. remains subject still to direction. However any man is to be paid, it is for a consideration, and he is by law accountable to the king for the money. He is accountable to the law for this sum, thus long in this lord's hand. For any other man, it is no excuse to let money be in a man's hands upon good behaviour. It was neither received according to law, nor paid according to law. If you establish this, you establish all pensions.

Sir Francis Winnington. This affair is necessary to be enquired into. If once Pensions be connived at here, it will give countenance to the judges, in their courts, to do the same. The French king never grew so great, as since Pensions were in parliament; though no man is so foolish as to own it. This way of receiving the king's money is against law. All the reve nue ought to be brought into the exchequer. This money of the Admiralty ought to be so. All fines ought to be brought into the exchequer, if not granted off by privy seals. This lord is a member of parliament; he ought not to finger money in the Treasury- This money he must speak of to nobody. These expressions bespeak something not fit to come to light. People receive the king's money by record. How came this letter to be taken away? It is well, if the money can lie half, or three quar ters, of a year without calling for. A trunk of money was delivered to a gentleman cross Ludgate-Hill, that should not speak one word of


Great implication in that he should tell nobody,' and these bills were signed just at the rising of the parliament. I take it, that the taking away this letter is a contempt to the house. 2000l. of it was paid, and the other 2000l. he kept to himself. If once detected, I hope others will be punished that are guilty.

Admiral Russel. I would have gentlemen consider what this money is. It is said, It is proper to be paid into the exchequer, or by privy seal,' Pray consider, this money belongs to the lord admiral's perquisites, to dispose of as the king shall direct. But if this lord shall dispose of it by the king's direction, I hope you will not send him to the Tower for this.

Sir Robert Cotton. This matter before you is of great consequence. When you enquire farther, this lord is not so criminal.

Mr. Boyle. I think this matter not plain, but much plainer than was expected. You have all the suspicion and ground to suspect something in this matter. When it was first started, this lord said something, and afterwards something more, and I hope that, if you send him to the Tower, he will tell you all. Rainsford refused to take his oath before the Commissioners of Accounts; and, the highest thing of all, the letter, is withdrawn, to stifle your information. I have heard it said, That England can never be ruined but by a house of commons.' I join in the motion for sending this lord to the Tower.'



Mr. Solicitor Trevor. This lord has denied paying any of this money to members of parliament. He says, He has not received nor paid this money without authority;' and some money is still in his hands. If it be so, that the money belongs to the Admiral, it belongs to his office, in point of law, to the perquisites of the Admiralty, and that is its proper chan nel. It appears not that it was disposed of to members, but it came into his hands as an offi◄ cer of the Admiralty.

« ПредыдущаяПродолжить »